![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The era of new governance in the last decades reflects the expanded space granted to the two non-state sectors – business and non-profit – in policy-making and implementation. By way of exploring whether and to what extent the institutional approach is still an effective method of analysing public policy, this article investigates the Jewish Agency for Israel as a case study, testing existing definitions for non-governmental organisations (NGOs and QUANGOs). The difficulty in finding the most appropriate definition serves as testimony to the feebleness of the institutional approach and the existing definitions for non-state players, and raises the need for new theoretical interpretations.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. Weaver and Rockman, “Assessing the Effects of Institutions.”
2. Dahl, On Democracy, 35–43.
3. Peters, “Political Institutions, Old and New”; Thelen and Steinmo, “Historical Institutionalism.”
4. Lijphart, Rogowski, and Weaver, “Separation of Powers.”
5. Immergut, “Theoretical Core of New Institutionalism”; Reich, “The Four Faces of Institutionalism”; West, “Formal Procedures, Informal Processes.”
6. Weaver and Rockman, “Assessing the Effects of Institutions.”
7. Ahrens, Governance and Economic Development.
8. Diermeier and Krehbiel, “Institutionalism as a Methodology.”
9. Palumbo and Mynard-Moody, Contemporary Public Administration, 3–10; Peters, The Politics of Bureaucracy.
10. Rosenbloom and Kravchuk, Public Administration.
11. Salamon and Anheier, “The International Classification of Nonprofit Organizations.”
12. Aggarwal, Choi, and Dow, “Probing Corporate Governance Globally”; Moe and Kosar, “The Quasi-Government.”
13. Kearns, Managing for Accountability.
14. Stansbury and Barry, “Ethics Programs and the Paradox of Control.”
15. United Nations, Economic and Social Council. Resolution 1996/31. 49th plenary meeting. New York, 25 July 1996.
16. Gordenker and Weiss, “Devolving Responsibilities.”
17. Alger, “The Emerging Roles of NGOs”; Kirk, “Governing Non-Governmental Public Serving Organization”; Raustiala, “State, NGOs and International Environmental Institutions.”
18. Hulme and Edwards, NGOs, State and Donors.
19. Brian, “A Major Transfer of Government Responsibility.”
20. Choi et al., “Dual Responsibilities of NGOs.”
21. Skelcher, “Reforming the Quango.”
22. Ibid.
23. Bell and Stockdale, “Examining Participatory Governance”; Frieling, Lindenberg, and Stokman, “Collaborative Communities through Coproduction”; Teernstra, “Contextualizing state-led gentrification.”
24. Kahler, Networked Politics Agency.
25. Gidron and Katz, “Patterns of Government Funding.”
26. Ministers’ Committee for Absorption and Immigration, Decision No. 139.
27. The State Comptroller and Ombudsman, Annual Report No. 36.
28. The State Comptroller and Ombudsman, Annual Report No. 40.
29. Ibid., 534.
30. Ibid., 528.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Adi Binhas
Adi Binhas is Lecturer at Beit-Berl Academic College, Israel.
Ori Arbel-Ganz
Ori Arbel-Ganz is Senior Lecturer at Beit-Berl Academic College.